Some of my comments on proposal #23

This morning, I learned that motion proposal #23 was submitted, and I quickly checked the proposal file and went to the relevant channel in the community Discord to learn about the discussion of this proposal. At first, I didn't find the corresponding discussion content in proposal and proposal-discussion. After asking, I learned that it was discussed in the "General" channel (Chinese). Thank you johnshao for quickly sharing the previous discussion content - Discussion for LikeCoin community proposal #23 - Organized for easy reference by me and others interested in this topic.

Contents of Proposition #23

Proposition #23 ( Proposal #23 ) is similar to Proposition #20 mentioned in my previous post, and is also a proposal to create a management committee. This time, the Creators Fund Management Committee (the direct translation is the Creators Fund Management Committee , hereinafter referred to as "CFMC") is to be established.

The content of the proposal titled Endorse a committee to manage the Creator's Fund (details can be found here ) reads as follows:

1. Motion to establish CFMC to manage the Creators Fund.
2. Allocate 2 million LikeCoins as a budget for the first 6 months.
3. Appointed the first 7 members, their Discord IDs are: edmondyu#9629, NoahLiu#9391, KenOokamiHoro#7356, Daisy#1990, leafwind#4213, anniezhang#0934 and mashbean#5293
4. In the future, if you want to increase (I don’t know if it includes a decrease) members, you must be appointed through the Chain Proposal.
5. The responsibilities of the CFMC include but are not limited to the following three:

• Monthly review of the relevant budget
• Review the budget allocation algorithm, outsource the execution plan, or execute it directly by the committee members
• Crypto Wallet to Manage Creator Funds

personal opinion

First of all, I agree with the decentralization principle and direction of the management and operation system of the LikeCoin community, and pay tribute to the founding team of LikeCoin to gradually promote and implement the decentralization model with practical actions! Out of expectation and participation in the healthy development of the community, I would like to express some personal views on this proposal.

First of all, in general, Endorse 's understanding is to confirm ( or ratify) , such as a thing that needs to be decided by voting has been implemented or happened before the vote, and the legality of the decision or implementation is formally confirmed through the voting process afterwards. This proposal is only a motion to establish a CFMC. There is no existing CFMC in operation, and the community needs to be voted for confirmation. Therefore, I think it is not appropriate to use Endorsement to describe this proposal. Propose ( motion ) is more applicable.

This proposal (like Proposal #20) is short in content text, but contains not simple decisions. It included setting up a committee, appointing 7 committee members for 1 year, passing a budget (the first 6 months), and handing over the wallet to the committee for management. I would say that each item here should provide more specific information and content for community members to think and judge.

For example:

The establishment of a committee should first define the purpose and objectives of the committee, its specific powers and responsibilities, its structure and composition, and its working mode, etc., so that community members can understand more clearly And consider whether you can participate in the work of the committee, and how to monitor and evaluate the work of the committee in the future.

There should also be clearer instructions on the requirements of members and their selection procedures , so that the wider public can easily consider whether they can participate in the relevant work.

What data or principles are used to formulate the budget , why should it be approved for half a year, and whether the budget for the second half of the year will be voted on?

For the management of fund wallets , whether there are corresponding management systems and rules (everyone knows that wallet signatures can not only use funds, but also vote or confirm other transactions), how to ensure the security of wallet keys, etc. The community has a clear understanding and consensus.

Maybe someone will think

Isn't it just to set up a committee, is it necessary to make it so complicated?

You talk so much as if it will "stop the world from turning." There are still many important things to do in the community (country), and these small things you talk about waste people's time?

The founding team has so much work, do you want them to continue to undertake so much work?

If someone is willing to come out and help out as a volunteer, what else do you want, do you still have to pick and choose?

Why do you have so many opinions and don't see what useful and constructive contributions you have made to the community?

Didn't they ask you when they founded LikeCoin? Otherwise, there would not even be a LikeCoin community now, so how can you make irresponsible remarks here?

......

These questions can be left to chat on other occasions. 😃

Here I just want to say that since this motion contains four decisions (establishing committees, appointing committee members, passing the budget, and authorizing the management of the wallet of public finance), I understand that the consensus should be the decision-making power for these matters. It belongs to the proposal level and needs to be voted by the community before it can be decided.

If you bundle several things together and let everyone vote, it will limit the choices of voters. For example, I am in favor of setting up a management committee, but I am not in favor of simply handing over the wallet to the committee for management. I think the various public financial wallets of the community should be There is an independent management system to manage, and I also don't agree that committee members are appointed in the form of a list (such as the cabinet). I think voters should have the right to choose each member, etc. But at present this proposal can only have everyone agree or disagree.

So I am not in favor of passing this simple and crudely worded proposal that bundles four decisions.

Amendment proposal

I propose to revise Proposal #23 (if technically feasible) to instead move to establish a preparatory group for the CFMC with a reasonable timetable to discuss the CFMC's terms of reference, work objectives, work model, work structure, The composition of committee members (such as the establishment of positions such as chairperson's documents) and the method of selection (such as the registration/nomination and election procedures of committee members) will be consulted and discussed, and a complete plan report and motion proposal will be submitted before the deadline. After the proposal was passed, the first CFMC was officially elected according to the relevant system.

I remember that edmondyu said in the discussion: (the establishment of CFMC) It is not urgent to say it is urgent, but if you start it earlier, things can move forward earlier.

I very much agree that the promotion of management decentralization and institutional democratization should be started earlier. It does take time to explore and learn democratic autonomy models and systems. In order to promote the decentralization of community operations, the founding team proposed to set up different committees to be responsible for the daily management of the community. is a good start. But setting up a committee does not mean decentralization. If the process is not democratic and the system is unclear, it can simply move power from one center to another.